4.7 Article

Transthyretin Antisense Oligonucleotides Lower Circulating RBP4 Levels and Improve Insulin Sensitivity in Obese Mice

期刊

DIABETES
卷 64, 期 5, 页码 1603-1614

出版社

AMER DIABETES ASSOC
DOI: 10.2337/db14-0970

关键词

-

资金

  1. National Institutes of Health National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases [K08-DK-84344, RR37-DK-43051, P30-DK-57521, T32-DK-07516]
  2. Sao Paulo Research Foundation (FAPESP) [2014/02218-6]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Circulating transthyretin (TTR) is a critical determinant of plasma retinol-binding protein 4 (RBP4) levels. Elevated RBP4 levels cause insulin resistance, and the lowering of RBP4 levels improves glucose homeostasis. Since lowering TTR levels increases renal clearance of RBP4, we determined whether decreasing TTR levels with antisense oligonucleotides (ASOs) improves glucose metabolism and insulin sensitivity in obesity. TTR-ASO treatment of mice with genetic or diet-induced obesity resulted in an 80-95% decrease in circulating levels of TTR and RBP4. Treatment with TTR-ASOs, but not control ASOs, decreased insulin levels by 30-60% and improved insulin sensitivity in ob/ob mice and high-fat diet-fed mice as early as after 2 weeks of treatment. The reduced insulin levels were sustained for up to 9 weeks of treatment and were associated with reduced adipose tissue inflammation. Body weight was not changed. TTR-ASO treatment decreased LDL cholesterol in high-fat diet-fed mice. The glucose infusion rate during a hyperinsulinemic-euglycemic clamp was increased by 50% in high-fat diet-fed mice treated with TTR-ASOs, demonstrating improved insulin sensitivity. This was also demonstrated by 20% greater inhibition of hepatic glucose production, a 45-60% increase of glucose uptake into skeletal and cardiac muscle, and a twofold increase in insulin signaling in muscle. These data show that decreasing circulating TTR levels or altering TTR-RBP4 binding could be a potential therapeutic approach for the treatment of type 2 diabetes.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据